- California passed a general anti-harassment law in 2014, AB 1825, that went into effect on January 1, 2015. It requires that supervisors in all firms with 50 or more employees receive training in “abusive conduct.” This requirement was added to an existing law requiring employers to provide two hours of sexual harassment training to supervisors within the first six months of the employee’s assumption of a supervisory role. The new law defines “abusive conduct” as:
. . . conduct of an employer or employee in the workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests. [It] may include repeated infliction of verbal abuse, such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults, and epithets, verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work performance.”
Malice is conduct that is “intended by the defendant to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others.”
The new law states that a “single act shall not constitute abusive conduct, unless especially severe or egregious.”
- Tennessee approved a “Healthy Workplace Act” in 2014 that is designed to curb verbal abuse at work by making public-sector employers immune to bullying-related lawsuits if they adopt a policy that complies with the law. The law applies only to public-sector employers, and administrators aren’t required to follow guidelines. If they do, however they receive immunity from potential lawsuits.
- Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed HB 216 into law in 2014 to mandate Abusive Conduct training for public sector The law requires state agencies to train supervisors and employees about how to prevent abusive conduct. The law takes effect July 1, 2015. Utah is the second state to pass a training-only law to begin to address abusive conduct in the workplace.
Every state has laws that protect employees from unlawful discrimination. These laws may be more expansive than similar federal laws, encompassing more employers and additional classes of victims. They may offer protection that is not available under federal law. For example, the U.S. Congress has yet to adopt legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but almost half of the states and the District of Columbia have adopted such laws. Thus, a victim of harassment based on sexual orientation may be able to file a lawsuit in state court that would not be possible in federal court. State discrimination laws may offer a wider range of damages, especially with claims related to age discrimination. Many attorneys prefer to bring suit in state courts to avoid federal courts, which tend to be hostile to employment law claims. You should check the laws in your state.